In the past few weeks, I have been noting the remarkable resistance to Obama among Kentuckians, including Democrats, and the polling data by region support the anecdotal evidence supplied by George Packer in a recent post.  Opposition to Obama has deepened in just the last two weeks, especially in eastern Kentucky, where Clinton led by 63 in mid-April and now leads by 74.  These margins from eastern Kentucky are approaching the comical.  In eastern Kentucky, according to SUSA, Obama has lost 22 points in the month of April in the Democratic primary poll.  Statewide, Clinton’s lead remains basically unchanged throughout the month (currently 63-27), but the race has tended to polarise between Louisville and the rest of the state, in much the same way Pennsylvania did in the closing weeks of the campaign.  That’s potentially better news for Yarmuth, whose 3rd District seat is centered on Louisville, but terrible news for Obama.  It is solidifying, rather than weakening, the image of him as the urban, liberal candidate who has no traction in the rest of the country.  The Kentucky primary is 22 days away, and Obama has done nothing but go down around the state outside Louisville for the last 30 days. 

Young voters may generally be trending Democratic, but young Democrats are definitely not going for Obama in the primary (he loses 18-34 year olds to Clinton by 28) and young voters generally do not prefer him to McCain in Kentucky, which he loses 63-29 overall.  He loses to McCain among these 18-34 year old voters by 41 points, while Clinton leads McCain by one in the same group (she trails by just 2 in the overall results).  That’s a pretty staggering difference.  Counterintuitively, Obama is more likely to receive support from older Kentuckians in the general than from younger ones.  43% of Democrats back McCain, and 44% back Obama.  It’s an open question whether he can secure a majority of his own partisans against McCain in this state.   

West Virginia is similarly unfriendly territory.  Rasmussen’s latest poll, which is now over a month old and so may overestimate Obama’s level of support, showed Clinton ahead 55-27.  Looking ahead to the general, 41% of respondents in WV said they were unlikely to vote for Obama against McCain (25% said the same about Clinton).  41%!  Even the demographics where Obama is usually very strong do not support him overwhelmingly: he leads among 18-29 year old Democrats by 5 points, and the only income group where he is even competitive is the $100K+ earners (he still trails by three).

Now Kentucky has been a “red” state in recent elections, but this SUSA polling shows that it could be competitive this year as it was in the ’90s (Clinton won here both times), unless Obama is the nominee.  West Virginia has been a “red” state for the past two cycles, but is not obviously out of reach for the Democrats (having voted for Clinton twice), but Obama seems to do unusually poorly in these states.  These were also states that Carter won in ’76, as did Truman in ’48.  The last Democrat to lose Kentucky and (technically) win the general election was Kennedy, but even Kennedy carried West Virginia.  So no Democrat has won the White House in the last 60 years and not won at least one of these states, and all but one winner has won both.  That doesn’t necessarily mean that a Democratic candidate must win these states, but it suggests that a Democratic candidate who has the ability to carry the old Border states is probably able to win the general election and one who cannot will not.